Skip to main content

About your Search

English 127
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 127 (some duplicates have been removed)
very supportive. i will let the other colleagues speak. >> president fong: commissioner hillis. >> commissioner hillis: a question, how we are moving forward in this proposition. do you know how many units are at stake? how many approved projects we have that have not started construction that can come back and request the reduction? >>: this was an issue that came up the conversation around prop c. i don't bring with me today the pipeline. we have the conversation i don't know if mr. rand would like to comment on the pipeline % have to consider the number of projects entitled that have yet to receive your instruction permit. this only applies to projects that choose to go from another option to an on-site option; it limits the universe of projects in the pipeline for whom this reduction would be applicable. the other thing that is import to know is that prop c although it articulates a reduction in the on-site -- establishes the floor of 12%. high-rise developments which comprise part of our pipeline which are under the 12 percent onsite obligation would not be eligible f
, commissioners, to march 14, commissioner antonini. >> aye. >> borden? >> no. >> hillis in >> no. >> moore. >> no. >> sugaya. >> no. >> wu. >> no. >> and commissioner president fong. >> aye. >> that motion fails, commissioners, 2-5. >> if you would like we could take up the motion with the intent to disapprove. >> commissioner moore. >> i would like to restate the motion as previously stated. >> and intend to deny. >> the motion is an intent to disapprove. >> that is correct. >> commissioner antonini? >> no. >> commissioner borden in >> aye. >> commissioner hillis. >> aye. >> moore. >> aye. >> hillis. >> aye. >> wu. >> aye. >> fong. >> no. so moved, that passes 5--2. push >> commissioners, that will place you on your final regularly calendared item, number 1 1. the fiscal year, 2013 to 2015 department budget and work program. this is an action item. >> last, but not least, commissioners, john with the planning department and we are here to ask for your approval today on our 2013, to 15, proposed budget. and keith will make most of the presentation and i did want to go with you the major changes t
hillis. so, commissioner hillis. >> please stand by; captioner change >> have you seen an impact from lowes. >> my name is keith, when lows opened up, we immediately took a 20 percent hit in our gross sales. i mean, within a week, you could tell. the monday through friday, sales have come back. >> our saturday sales are still 20, to 25 percent down since they opened. which has cut 22 people from the staff on saturdays. >> thank you. >> so, yeah, i mean, i i think, i share some of moore's concerns, i have a hard time approving the use in this location, given kind of the comment and the testimony that we have heard. >> commissioner antonini? >> well, thank you. yeah, i have mixed feelings on this. i'm also a small business while dentistry and medical services are different from hardware, there are similarities. they could put a dental clinic next to my store and i don't care. they are going to hire people that are not confident and do unnecessary work and under pay them and things like that. people know the difference and they come in and they know the kind of service and care that they
the next generation of innovative store or stores that we could put into them. >> commissioner, hillis? >> just, on the continuance, i mean, i, if we vote, if we vote against the continuance and we vote for the intent to deny, when is that heard next week? >> we would bring it back to you commissioners in a matter of two weeks to give the planners the chance to draft something and get it out to you, if there was some sort of a time restriction or consideration we could potentially get it to turn around. two weeks, would probably be... >> and we do like to get the draft to you a week prior to that. >> right. >> okay. >> okay, i have a question. >> go ahead. >> on the matter of continuance, commissioners, to march 14, commissioner antonini. >> aye. >> borden? >> no. >> hillis in >> no. >> moore. >> no. >> sugaya. >> no. >> wu. >> no. >> and commissioner president fong. >> aye. >> that motion fails, commissioners, 2-5. >> if you would like we could take up the motion with the intent to disapprove. >> commissioner moore. >> i would like to restate the motion as previously stated. >> and in
>> commissioner borden: aye >> commissioner hillis: aye >> commissioner moore: aye >> commissioner sugaya: aye >> commissioner wu: >> president fong: aye it passes unanimously, 7-0. we do have a member of the entertainment commission here, for item 13, entertainment procedures and processes. >>: whenever you're ready? >>: good afternoon everyone my name is nicholas king, i'm here to give a brief presentation. this is an overview of what-- responsible for, and excessive noise prevention and enforcement. the epidemic commission regulates entertainment and nightlife in san francisco generally. will begin with basic definitions and underpinnings of our permits. i'll get to the handouts and described them. the commission issues many types of permits. today we will focus on -- we will get the conditions of the way to be on the same page. the first amendment of the constitution, its equivalent sections in the california section. people are guaranteed the right to gather for peaceful and lawful purposes. it is a guarantee in any attempts by us as the city to regulate assembly and performance is c
like to take roll. >> commissioner antonini: here >> commissioner hillis: here >> commissioner sugaya: here >> commissioner moore: here. >> commissioner borden: here. >>: item 1, 2013.0029x, at 222 2nd street, request for determination of compliance, request for continuance. we have received late request for continued items 10 a, b & c. for case -- the requested data continuances to february 14. i have no other items. i have no speaker cards for matters propose for continuance. i do have speaker card for items on 1741 powell. >> president fong: public comments on items proposed for continuance. >>: good afternoon president fong, commissioners. we did make this request for continuance as a sponsor of this special district use legislation. very briefly i did want to state that the sud is contingent on the lease negotiations that the mta is conducting with the owner of 1741 powell. the negotiations are going. our requested for a continuance of one week. >> president fong: additional public comment on the two items proposed for continuance? >>: my name is richard hamlin longtime residen
. is there any public comment on this particular item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner hillis. >> commissioner hillis: a couple of quick questions. you have the ability to revoke the permit too? >>: yes. ultimately, it's -- a long suspension proceeding is what precedes that. it goes back to the first amendment issues. we don't act fast and step in immediately and say "permit revoked." there is a process that involves notice and the opportunity to respond. there is an eventual suspension of the permit. it is important to keep in mind for your information and anyone listening is that we permit entertainment. revocation of the permit is not shutting the place down; it is a popular misconception even among employees of the city. we don't step in with a squad of people and shut a place down and say there is no more live entertainment. >> commissioner hillis: the same thing holds for us? a cu cannot be revoked? >>: a cu can be revoked through public hearing. >>: there is no transfer. in theory, if there was a nightclub owned by you commissioner antonini and commissioner borden -- i
hillis? >> just two questions. one second floor, what could that be used for with the country club? >> the variety of uses in the castro street neighborhood district would be allowed on the second level, retail sales, financial service with a conditional use and medical service. >> so restaurant-type use? >> a restaurant would not be allowed on the second level in the castro neighborhood commercial district, no. >> do you want to respond? do you use this space outside now at 10:00 at night? would it be a hardship? >> currently our hours are until 11:00 monday through thursday, until midnight friday and saturdays and 10:00 on sundays, but any noise that we have out back is negligible compared to the noise of the back patio of the mixed bar, which is three doors down, which is like being at a dance party. >> do you use the back patio now at all hours that you are open? >> very minimally. >> so i'm all right with that. >> thank you. >> commissioner moore. >> mr. sanchez, how many people are allowed to gather on the deck based on structural? >> i do not have the expertise t
. >> here. >> commissioners hillis and sugaya are expected to be late and commissioner moore. >> here. >> first up are items proposed for continuance . item one planning policy on timing implementation is proposed for continuance to march 14, 2013. item two at 194-194(a) sweeny street is proposed for continuance to april powerth, 2013. item three case for 793 south van ness avenue is proposed an indefinite continuance. further on your calendars commissioners. under the regular calendar item 15, the bicycle parking ordinance is proposed for continuance and item 16 amendments to the planning code sections 604 to provide the copy on a sign shall not be treated as a new sign and continued to march 7. i have a few speaker cards for this one. item 17 for 35 la grande avenue, request for discretionary review is proposed for continuance to march 21, 2013. under your 330 calendar commissioners you can not take this item up at this time but i would like to advise you there is a request from the project sponsors for this is proposed to continuance for april 4, 2013 so what was a long cale
, the proposed project has two sites. >> commissioner hillis? >> commissioners, as i did last time, i need to ask for a recusal as well as items 11a and 11b for the same reasons, i work for fort mason center. >> commissioner antonini, moved to recuse him? >> second. >> commissioner sugaya? >> yes, i have a question for mr. hillis, in past situations, i've had conflicts because i've worked on portions of environmental impact reports, in that case t city attorney's office ruled that i should recuse myself aon the eir portion but i was eligible and they felt comfortable in my participating and voting on the actual project. in this case, it would -- i don't know, i'm not the attorney, but did you ask whether or not you could participate in the eir portion versus the project portion? because it would seem your conflict relates more to the actual approval of the projects rather than the technicalities and the contents of the environmental impact report. >> we did talk about this, okay, do you want to mention it? >> i mean, if they've already said -- >> yeah, it's one project, the advice was to recuse m
. >> commissioner hillis? >> here. >> commissioner moore 1234 >> here. >> and commissioner sugaya? >> here. >> commissioners, first up for consideration of items proposed for continuance, item 1, south side between howard and folsom streets; lot 125 and 126 in assessor's block 3735 - mandatory discretionary review, pursuant to planning code section 317 (e), of building permit application no. 2012.11.21.4720, proposing to merge units 1202 (lot 125) and 1203 (lot 126) in an existing 91 unit building within the c-3-o (sd) (downtown commercial, downtown office special development) zoning district and 320-i height and bulk district proposed for continuance to march 21st, 2013. * case no. 2011.0800c, 601 van ness avenue >> is there any public comment on the one item proposed for continuance? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner borden? >> continue item 1 to the date on the calendar. >> second. >> on that motion to continue item 1 to march 21st, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissi
that this was set up initially through a loss suit that was filed privately. and settled and the money, mr. hillis knows more about it than me. i think because he is used to staff the committee. but, i think that the intent was for the funds, which do not replicate themselves. i mean, i forget the original amount, mr. hillis, around $2 million? >> $2.5 million. >> yes. and then each time there is a grant allocation, then it gets depleted. so i think that we have to treat that some what as a priority for the community to be able to apply for funding. and that is not to say that they are not worthy city projects too. but i just want to comment on the 250. it seems aufully large to me. having dealt with design guidelines in the past and especially with respect to historic areas. and i don't want to get into a debate about it. but i would ask the department to take a more serious look at what the ultimate cost will be. >> it is likely that some level of environmental review will be necessary, and if it is an nir it has to be more than that, but i am hopefully we will able to do it within that. >> ther
>> second. >> commissioner hillis? >> just a quick question. the market street project, manager, we have people working on market street. >> yeah, and that is marlo's isaac's position. it will make that position permanent. >> commissioner, what we did is that we txed a position in the current budget and so we used an existing position and temporarily converted it but property ject manager is on board so we are adding a position in to put the project manager in. >> in the $250 million request if that does not come to fruition. >> we will just note it, it does not impact the budget because the money is already appropriate ated it is really more informational. >> right. >> if that number is not actually inside of the budget. because we don't, it is already created. >> if the 0.05 fte that was on like the community initiated, so 0.05. that was that is going up 0.15. >> it is going up to 0.15 and we reallocated it from another line item in the historic preservation. >> what 0.05 mean, you could be divided on the way to work? >> just kidding. >> but, maybe, you know, i don't know if the p
. commissioner hillis. >> sure. i agree with much of what commissioner borden said. i think when you boil this down, we can redebate the central subway project every time we have a station project before. so, whatever the item. but when you're boring it down, it seems to me like we're vastly improving the condition upon removing these machines for folks at north beach whether they're residents or businesses instead of doing it on columbus avenue, we're now doing it on the pagoda site, which i imagine will be less impactful or a lot less impactful than doing it in the street. we've got a project that's pretty much identical to the project we approved, but probably has more opportunity and more feasibility to be built. and i agree with ms. christiansen, i hope this leads to more debate about than it is here, extending the subway to north beach and onto fisherman's wharf. so, i guess the only question i have is something mr. bruno raised about could we impact or could we reduce the impact on the neighborhood even more by moving the machines to the side, you know, under the new library, under
you act. thank you. >>: i have other questions. >>: mr. hillis. >> commissioner hillis: we're kind of the same position we were a couple of months ago. the cinema and the hot springs have been in japantown a long time; they're clearly important to the people and businesses in japan town. there is no reason not to bring additional people who haven't been to japan town. but it cannot disrupt the businesses that are there. your sound person and their sound person need to figure it out you don't want us to do that because you will not like the outcome. i support the continuance. and come back with something that works for everybody. >> president fong: public comment is all finished. thank you. commissioner borden. >> commissioner borden: i've been to pa'ina loung. the food is great, the entertainment is great. i've been to kabuki also, it's great. we really want to be able to support all the businesses but we need the support all businesses. there needs to be a sound study, a couple of different determinations. seeing it would level the sound bleeds; turning it up to see a what poi
just brought up by commissioner hillis as to it looks like that one little part, although i think we already approved a project on it. but one of your map shows that area at castro and 17th street, i believe it is, is separate from the rest of the district. and i thought you had said in your remarks that you wanted to include that as part of this zoning also. >> i'm putting that back up on the overhead just to take a look to clarify. but our recommendation was to convert the whole of the remaining upper market ncd to the nct and there are two parcel here that i'm pointing to that were not included in the proposed legislation. the department's recommendation is that these parcels be included in the upper market nct. >> i think both of those i would be in favor of. it sounds reasonable to me. and then i think you also wanted to remove the sunseting for the allowances, i guess it was the food service off-site. * and also to extend the off-site food service to anything within that district. >> planning's recommendation is actually to -- with criteria that are set forth in the case rep
. >>: thank you. >> commissioner hillis: ultimately what i look forward is the entertainment commission -- you limited to 74 dbs. >>: we did at that time because the sound limit was above that. we have a pass or fail. we have a complete report done by the venue; what you got was about a fourth of what should have been there. you really need something much more thorough. again, commissioner moore stated, ultimately whoever does the report, a full sound report needs to be done. >> commissioner wu: as part of the motion i want the entertainment commission to be part of the motion. >>: if we are talking about an independent analysis as proposed by commissioner moore, and if it's mr. saltar, it is only fair that the two i don't want to say "sides" share the cost. if it is independent it cannot be funded by one side i don't know the project sponsor is comfortable with that or not at this point. i don't want to have a series of battles between two experts. this is this, that is that. my testing method with this. the other guy says yeah but my testing method was this. i don't think the commissione
hillis. >> so, i'm supportive of the project, too. i wanted to comment on mission bay in general. we hear the same things a lot. office park, suburban. we were talking a little bit on the break that mission bay is 50% built or so. you know, now is a good time for maybe the agency and the cac and whoever owns the land, you know, places you sold it and places you haven't to come back and figure out what tweakses the mission bay to make it a little -- so we don't repeat ourselves every time we come back. the best way to make the buildings look like they're separate lots, make them separate lots for one. we don't do our retail on [speaker not understood]. seawall lot 337 adds to that debate and the four sales sites. i want to encourage those who are working on mission bay to make some corrections midway to try to you know, alleviate some of the concerns that are constantly raised about mission bay when these projects come up. but i think that the office allocation is fine and you've done a good work, kind of breaking up this block-long building into smaller chunks, so. >> commissioner sugaya.
or another? >> thank you, commissioner hillis. but that was one when i mentioned we had explored i think four different options that we brought to the community in addition to the currently approved plan. that was one of them. we actually had a few different versionses of that. one was leaving the machines underground in chinatown. one was bringing them to the current retrieval site and leaving them. and then there was a third that was bringing them further up, further northwest on columbus and leaving them. they were, as i mentioned for the different alternatives that we brought forward to the community, there were pros and cons. in the end the confluence of being able to help address the pagoda site, of being able to pull the machines out as is currently contemplated in our contract, not leave something underground, that kind of tipped the balance. at that particular meeting at the time there was -- seemed to be little to no public support for bringing the machines to north beach and leaving them in the ground. but that is something that's viable, it's something that we could do. but in wei
of an interim thought. >> commissioner hillis. >> so, i'm also supportive of the legislation. i think probably if we use the words unique, funky and [speaker not understood], they're all probably in violation of the planning code. if we looked around. [laughter] >> we could use that adjective unique funky, in violation of the planning code. it's amazing cafe floor is only 900 square feet when you walk by. it feels bigger. there is a lot happening obviously. it is a very active space. so, i'm okay with the legislation. i'm okay recognizing this as an exception for one business. i mean, i think we did that just before, you know, on the sacramento street. we broadened it. but we broadened it recognizing it is not applying to anybody else. so, we're kind of going through the motions. i think that's the planning code is for making things everything uniform. the planning commission i think has a role in recognizing we live in a pretty unique geographic area with unique buildings and, you know, these exceptions come up. so, i'm okay making an exception limited to cafe floor. just a question on the he
't. >> commissioner hillis sorry, commissioner sugaya. >> so i think i share commissioner borden's comments and issues. i think it's just a better use on geary. it doesn't generate a lot of walk bitraffic and you have walk up and that is good. a quick question for the project sponsor. do you operate any -- all your restaurants under the domino's brand? >> well, >> well, yes. sorry. domino's doesn't allow you to operate others. >> i share commissioner borden's concerns. i think one of the problems that we haven't realized the potential for fillmore is the overconcentration of formula retail. so i prefer that geary site. >> i share your concern, but regarding the drug dealing going on at that site, charlie's pharmacy right there, he is really worried about the vacancy. he is really worried about that. six people in nine years now and a vacancy isn't going to help. a busy restaurant versus one employee would reduce the rift raft. >> i think i agree. a mcdonalds has been brought up as part of the issue on that block, too. and it's busy. but it doesn't seem to generate the street prese
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 127 (some duplicates have been removed)